[BNW] Redesigned Colors and Icons (RCI) 2-7-2019: v. 3.0

[Kossatx]

Great job! Is it possible to use this mod without using "Brave New World" expansion? I like sometimes to play without any expansion, but the mod only works if "Brave New World" is activated

 

[dylansan]

Thoughts (WIP)?

 

[adan_eslavo]

Maybe I'm too used too old version, but it feels odd.

Things I think go in a good way: Russia, Carthage (both might have been changed too much), Indonesia.

Things I thing go in a wrong way: Morocco (too similar to Shoshone), France (pink was easily distinguishable), Inca (light blue was fine), Polinesia (now is meh).

 

[dylansan]

Maybe I'm too used too old version, but it feels odd.

Things I think go in a good way: Russia, Carthage (both might have been changed too much), Indonesia.

Things I thing go in a wrong way: Morocco (too similar to Shoshone), France (pink was easily distinguishable), Inca (light blue was fine), Polinesia (now is meh).

I think we both are probably too used to it, but I'm glad that you generally like them all the way they are.

If I do release this, it'll be an alternative to the current colors, not a replacement. The biggest changes here are the countries I've most often seen complaints about.

You're right about Morocco, That's probably why I went the way I did originally.

Indinesia hasn't changed (but I did change the light/shading overall so it may look different).

Other minor changes include India (more saturated, cleaner green), Venice (brighter background, more purpley icon to distinguish from Carthage/Japan) and Japan (less purpley red).

Are there any civs in the current 3.0 version that you have trouble distinguishing? Units in particular, as making 43 civs clearly distinct on the minimap is impossible. What about barbs, are Ethiopia, Korea and Greece far enough away from the black/red?

 

[adan_eslavo]

I think we both are probably too used to it, but I'm glad that you generally like them all the way they are.

If I do release this, it'll be an alternative to the current colors, not a replacement. The biggest changes here are the countries I've most often seen complaints about.

You're right about Morocco, That's probably why I went the way I did originally.

Indinesia hasn't changed (but I did change the light/shading overall so it may look different).

Other minor changes include India (more saturated, cleaner green), Venice (brighter background, more purpley icon to distinguish from Carthage/Japan) and Japan (less purpley red).

Are there any civs in the current 3.0 version that you have trouble distinguishing? Units in particular, as making 43 civs clearly distinct on the minimap is impossible. What about barbs, are Ethiopia, Korea and Greece far enough away from the black/red?

I don't think so. Apart from Japan/Carthage similarity there were all ok imo.

 

[ryanmusante]

The changes seem minor and good overall. It's good to have the best distinction by contrast.

 

[dylansan]

Some further tweaks. I'm decently happy with this, so as long as I haven't missed something obvious or created a color combo everyone hates, I may proceed to finalize this into something downloadable.

Notable changes this time around:

• reverted changes to Polynesia and Inca - they were more interesting before
• gave Venice a unique pinkish color. I couldn't quite convince myself to use the bubblegum pink from France for it, but it's in the same vein, and should at least be distinct from other colors. It's kinda inspired by the bricks of St Mark's Campanile, but not exactly. It's more inspired than the previous color scheme, though.
• Gave Morocco it's beige and green again, this time based on colors found on a "Banner of the Moors". The red and green is just hard to make both pretty and legible, not to mention, nothing like the modern flag of Morocco existed at the time of Ahmad Al-Mansur.
• Darkened the blue of Korea slightly, as it was very similar to Babylon and would blend together on the minimap.
• Gave Portugal a slightly darker shade of gray so it's hopefully more easy to distinguish from Japan on the minimap.
• Russia's background color is somewhere in between the previous brown and blueish colors. There's not much historical basis for the background color, but red or white (or yellow) would not work very well. Blue was historically associated with nobility, but Babylon is already the "blue + blue" civ, and varied colors are more interesting, I think.

Here's the flat colors so it's easier to imagine how they'd look as unit icons and on the minimap, etc. The shading has a stronger impact on how the colors are perceived than you may expect.



Edit: are Siam and Polynesia too similar? That might actually give me a reason to switch Polynesia's background to pink, even if it's not quite so nice. Polynesia is one of few civs where pink is arguably a historically relevant color.

 

[ryanmusante]

I appreciate the flat style. I think it would probably appear better on the graphs with such a style in-game. What other parts of the game use that particular shading on the standard icons?

 

[dylansan]

I appreciate the flat style. I think it would probably appear better on the graphs with such a style in-game. What other parts of the game use that particular shading on the standard icons?

Well, I really just showed the flat style because it's easier to judge the color combos, but you raise an interesting point. It's theoretically possible to use a flat style for some smaller versions of the icons, which might make them more readable, or at least nice looking.

But some of the smaller versions of the icons are actually generated in game by drawing the icon onto a colored circle, which doesn't always look great, but there's no way to change those as far as I know.